Thanks for starting such a topic Jeroen, as it would be nice to hear how people feel about the different aspects of field herping interaction with the animals and its effects.

Personally, I always try to catch most Colubrid snakes that I see, whether it be Montpellier snake in Greece or a grass snake in the UK. However, I do not handle them for long, I calm them with a cloth bag so they remain still for some photographs and then release them very quickly. If it is a hatchling snake I may not even bother 'posing' it at all as they are very prone to stress. In my opinion it is far more rewarding to catch the snake for a short period so that better pictures can be made rather than seeing its tail disappear into a wall and have nothing to show for your find. Some people will argue that you do not have the 'knack' for spotting snakes before they flee, but if you tried this tactic with many European colurbid (I.e Malpolon, Dolichophis) you would never get a photo!

In the UK many field herpers do not interact with Adders, as often it is not required as they remain still and can be photographed without causing any additional stress. Having said this I know people who have been catching and measuring the same adders for years (sometimes over a decade) and repeatedly seen the same animals flourish year after year.

I very rarely catch any lizard at all. I usually sneak very slowly and get a photo as the animal was found. The only time I ever usually try to catch a lizard is for the larger species such as Pseudopus apodus or Timon lepidus.

I am of course guilty of venturing onto some areas of land where I do not belong and have been shouted at on many occasions. However this is merely accidental in most cases, and often after explaining what I am doing to land owners that are more than happy to allow me to carry on with what I am doing.

Matt 

Hi,

for me it´s pretty simple.

At my local spots (even those far away from home) I catch nothing beside I have a really good reason for doing this - like a fragilis on the road ;-)
But I visit some of my areas 50 times a year and I see some of these snakes (berus, coronella) more than 10 times. It would be pretty stupid (also not neccassary) to catch these everytime.
I even try not to "disturb" them to long while getting my identification pics with a 180er macro lens from around 2-4 meters away. as soon as I have what I need I leave them. I rarely spend many extra time to get a good in situ shot.

On holyday I act often different...

But at least I see no reason to catch a snake in shed or with a full belly as long as I have allready a few good shots from that species in that area. If we are not too many people we also try to stay together to avoid that some of the group are on the other side of the hill at the moment we find something special. 

I believe that too much excitement on catching reptiles is bad and dangerous (for the reptiles). Too much flipping is also very bad. Herpers must respect the animals and their habitat and try to handle as less as possible. In many cases, photos helped lots of reptiles to avoid being killed (my case for example with herpetofauna.gr), but I believe that if you have your photos already, you should reduce to the minimum the handling thing.

Also, if you have to handle then do it as short as possible (that's the bad thing when a trip is made by big groups..) and it's better NOT to handle lizards at all and NEVER catch a snake from the tip of the tail and no strong grips.

Trip reports make us wanna catch everything we see, just for the report, even if we already have photos of species we see, but this is not so wise. Herpers must put limits, because if they don't respect and protect herpetofauna then who will?

It was a good idea to reject photos with hands but this is not enough. 

I catch snakes on my trips,because otherwise,most offen you just get a glimpse!I've tried 'the spot the snake before it spots you' approach but,as Matt says,it's practicaly imposibble with most Colubrid species.And even if you do spot at first,it doesn't take much before it sees you and flee out of site,where you can rarely find it again.With lizards,it's a different story..usually they will let you get closer to them so you are able to take some photos and even if they get out of site,you can easily relocate them (except if the terrain is very difficult),because of their 'run and stop' method of escape,so you can follow them for some time untill you get your pictures!That's why I thing catching lizards isn't that neccessary,except maybe if you encounter a certain species for the first time in your life(like that P.tauricus on my avatar photo:))! I'm always very careful not to hurt the animals.I handle them very gently and for as short time as posibble!

When I've cought a certain snake and photographed it,up close and than I encounter the same species again I'd rather try and get an in-situ photo(now that I have the portrait),than catching it,too.

I don't handle highly venomous snakes like vipers!

I always put flipped stuff back to it's original place! 

Well, there are indeed many aspects of this issue. We must treat the animals well, but in my opinion we should also try to become very emotional.

We must assume that catching a snake and lots of other animals will cause some stress. That is not necessarily harmful to an animal - it can actually save it life when attacked by some predator! I doubt that the "usual" catching, checking and photographing a snake will cause any harm. As a matter of fact there are numerous published field studies (for the purpose of e.g. population dynamics) involving capture, marking, release and re-capture. If individuals which had been involved in such activities, suffered from increased mortality or just longterm change of behaviour, then the results would be of very limited use. For instance in Herpetological Review there have been quite a lot of papers treating the effect on reptiles and amphibians when we handle them or otherwise expose them to various actions. I do not recall whether there have been any papers on the effect of handling snakes, but I guess there have been such papers. If it is suspected that capturing snakes may be harmful to them, I suggest well documented material should be provided. Matt's example of field herpers in the UK who catch and measure adders year after year without harming them is very relevant.

How do I want to catch a snake? As seldom as possible! If I can watch it within a reasonably close distance and get some nice photos, then I much prefer to keep my fingers away. I really like to have fully natural photos. It is nearly always possible to see from a photo whether snake has been handled in advance, and I always admire those shots where I can see that this snake has not been handled first.

However, obviously the snake will usually evade if you do not catch it! For sure I want to identify the snake. If I can readily do that and if I can see that I do not need to handle or photograph that snake, then I just let it go. But in other cases I try to catch. Regarding Jeroen's question:
"Do you catch any snake, even if it's the 24th ammodytes of the day?"

For sure I will not catch the 24 ammodytes (unless it has a very unusual pattern, size etc.)! How about that "kick of catching"? Well, that was some 30-35 years ago when I was a young inexperienced boy! Today: No, not really.

I will show you one example of a Platyceps najadum which I observed in Greece quite some years ago. It was early in the morning in April. The weather was a bit cold, but quiet and sunny. I saw it basking and I was able to photograph it, and I found its posture quite unique as the entire body was exposed to sun, but the head was in shade (see this photo). I watched and photographed it for approx. 10 minutes. That was indeed great, and I did not feel any "need" to catch the snake (it might also have been difficult). I found it so interesting to wonder whether it had deliberately placed its head in the shade. Yes, why not? That might have prevented the snake from becoming partly blinded by the sharp light of the sun. So far I have not seen that behaviour presented in publications or at the internet. Although I only had a lousy compact camera (digital), this memory has been really great!

My observations on social behaviour in Zootoca vivipara would not at all make sense if I had captured these lizards!
http://www.euroherp.com/forum/subject/269/

But still, I find it fully acceptable to catch reptiles and amphibians under other circumstances.

Kind regards,
Henrik Bringsøe 

Hi,

my view on the matter is indeed pretty similar to the one of Henrik.

I also think that one's should always be curious about stress involved in handling of species, because it can vary with species, and also within the same species between sexes, age, and time of the year. Here's an example. This year I handled quite a lot of adult amphibian for Bd sampling purposes. When I did the sampling on Bufo viridis, released males where calling again few seconds after they have been released. And they would still come and grab my fingers for amplexus if I shook them on the surface of the water, or would still come and bump into my galloshes when I stepped into the water and produced small waves. That was pretty funny indeed. This shows clearly that in these conditions, the stress for males Bufo viridis during the mating period is very reduced.
Same with Bombina variegata (some would even bite my finger when I shake it in front of their snout).

Another example, once I was sampling Iberolacerta bonnali for tissue (DNA analysis), and we caught lizards with a knot. After being handled, we cut few centimeters of the ti pof the tail, and released the lizard. Well, I remember clearly that I caught the same individuals a second time 10 minutes right after its release, with the same technique! And the lizard was not shy at all, I could approach it at about 50-40 centimeters.

But, maybe with a gravid female adder, or gravid female Zootoca, the stress involved might be high, and therefore no need to catch them. What's cool with these species is that you can easily take picture of them without catching them.

Otherwise, if I'm not studying a species, or if I'm not on vacation looking for species I've never seen before, then I don't catch animals.
Sometimes I catch newts or brown frogs for identification purposes, but that lasts only few seconds (newts) or few minutes (brown frogs).

And yes, with age, we don't feel the need to catch as much as when we where young. So I guess we should be cool about young herpers who catch every snake they see, eventually, they'll slow down with time, and that's a good way to learn and to be a better field herpetologist. 

As it becomes clear,everyone that goes field herping catches animals depending on many factors..but it is a fact that no field herper has only in-situ photos in his collection!So,I think the question is not should we catch them but how and when!? In that aspect a more useful discussion (especially for young and not so experienced herpers like me)would be on which is the least harmful and stressful way of catching the animals and under what cercumstances it should be done! It would be nice if you guys share some key point on what we should and what we should NOT do when trying to catch an animal(for example like Ilias pointed out some)..I know there's a lot of info published on that issue but so is for the issue of catching or not..besides it would be interesting to hear more points of view from different people! 

I agree with Henrik, sometimes if you can spot the snake before it spots you it is possible to get a photograph. I have done this on quite a few occasions, here are a couple I have managed to dig out.

Juvenile Dolichophis jugularis (Note you could never get a photo like this of an adult unless it was in the middle of a road or something)

A Platyceps najadum how it was found

And of course, you can create a photo such as this by catching the snake ;-)

On some occasions it is even possible to get a photo of the king of camera shy snakes, such as this juvenile Malpolon insignitus I photographed years ago. Probably only because he is facing the opposite way and could not see me!

Of course,I agree with Henrik,too! Don't catch if not neccessary! And I absoutely agree that in-situ photos are the greatest of all..as it's seen from your wonderful shots,guys!Thank you for sharing them!:) 

> And I absoutely agree that in-situ photos
> are the greatest of all..
Also when we're talking about newts? ;-)

You all seem to (logically) think of the shy legless critters, but imho a decent photograph of a newt (in aquatic phase) requires an aquarium + quite a deal of stress for the often non-cooperative animal...

 

I agree that in situ pics are very nice + much more interesting BUT I think it depends on what type of picture you aim for. The najadum shot of Henrik's is absolutely great as a documentation and to tease our minds about this snake's behaviour (as well as his excellent recent post on Zootoca). On the other hand, however, I would personally not be satisfied if that would be the only picture I have of that species, because I also (or let's confess: rather) want a picture showing most of the body and displaying the animal's features (head details). Henrik's type of picture is a very precious observation to him (and to those who get to share it), but -let's not forget- a very, very rare stroke of luck. Or at least the result of many years of field herping.
 

@ Ilias: I have to admit that I indeed like to have as many as possible of the observed species with their picture in each report.
A couple of reasons: (a) quality of the report (attractiveness + representativity for the visited area), (b) documenting intraspecific variability between different parts of Europe (although if that would be the only goal, I'd have to catch and photograph each specimen...), (c) pro-active photo collecting, anticipating future 'new' species (e.g. kotschyi from Crete).
Hunting for all species in each area we visit, we also sometimes are able to contribute new knowledge (atlas projects etc.), although I have to admit we visit many known spots too.
 

In general, we all seem to agree quite well, no?

It's probably sad to say, but my biology studies maybe made me less sensitive to animal welfare, but rather to sustainablity of populations (- believe it or not, after the poaching discussion). For instance, when I kill an animal with the car, I am sad because of personal sentiment towards the animal (especially when it's a cat snake on Milos - my favourite European snake...), but I don't really think I will damage the Milos population of cat snake. OK, a normal tourist would not go out to drive after dark, and if I would have stayed at home, it would not have happened at all. The trucks of the Milos mines, however, produce a high density traffic which can have severe(r) effects. That's where the population (and not an individual specimen) comes under attack, I feel.

I think animals have to be able to deal with a certain amount of stress to survive, but it's sometimes hard to settle for crappy pictures, if you're dealing with a snake that's not cooperative... Again thinking at the population level, we should care more about habitat destruction, animal disturbance, ... when dealing with small habitats or populations (often those in anthropogenic stress or at the limits of their tolerance like in areas with little sunshine etc.), in my opinion. 

Let's talk confessions...

The worst herping thing I have done, is the nocturnal beach observation of Caretta caretta on Crete, earlier this year. It was also an occasion for Ilias and me to discuss these things, and it became clear that we felt maybe a little bit different about it. Difficult issue, that's for sure...

Why I consider this "my worst" herping act: disturbing a gravid female of a threatened species, which is also at a high trophic level in the food chain (sorry, but a rare mosquito is just not that appealing to me...). We only disturbed 1 animal + we took into account what we knew about the species (= literature says that animals going back to the sea suffer little or not from disturbance). There was a nest at the exact same spot (99% chance being from that same female) a few days later, so at least she was not freaked to death or something...

The guilty feelings have to be balanced against a truely amazing natural experience, so my worst herping act may also be my most memorable herp observation. I haven't seen Caretta just swimming in the sea (cf. Zakynthos), but I dare to be so bold to guess that being so close to this magnificent animal at night on the beach, is quite something else...

Of course, the overall beach tourism (in which our crazy kind of tourist does not participate at all) is much worse. Without protection by NGOs, nearly all nests would be destroyed for sure! Also, I cannot imagine that the one time disturbance we made, would threaten the survival of the species. BUT what if everybody would do this + it's (always) better to leave the animals in peace.

So tell me, what do you think? Would you do the same thing or is this against your herping ethics? 

I have to say, just for the record, that we didn't disturb the turtle while she was digging, she could not see or feel us, and we just took photos after she decided to leave the nest and while she was some seconds away from the sea. But this was also disturbance, of course: I don't recommend it.


About handling snakes (Ilian@), I'll write my personal opinion: I hate to see photos like these (sorry Daniel, Petr and Lukas, but):
http://en.balcanica.info/2-1707
http://en.balcanica.info/2-527
http://en.balcanica.info/2-315

this is not the proper way to handle a snake. It causes too much stress and physical damage to the snake. If you have to handle a snake, always one hand at the vent and one at the "chest" (like holding big lizards for ex. Iguanas) Your hands should be "branches" and not gripping strong. You will notice how a snake reacts when you grip it, or catch from the neck and tip of tail. It's just not right (without considering the damage...). And you will feel that snake feels safer when you "play the branch", by stop hissing, biting and do like crazy.
Handling vipers need experience. Don't handle if you don't have!

Also, if you see a snake very stressful and doesn't calm down, just leave it.

Lizards: better not try to handle at all. there is no reason to do.

I don't feel very well giving "tips" for handling snakes, but I don't want to see pictures like these anymore. Also, I insist that we have to put limits on handling and do it as short as possible and to the least.

Sorry for my bad english 

Although I think you are a little more sensitive to these matters than me, I agree with you, Ilias. In fact, here's a picture of you setting the perfect example :-))) =>

(c) Daniel Bohle

((( I hope no-one starts to shout now, that this picture is unnecessary ;-), but come on, it was our biggest snake so far! )))

Although snakes are strong and agile, a snake's body is not build to support its entire weight whilst being held by its tail. Maybe a beginner's mistake in some cases, but common sense, imho.

A note on the "ugly ammodytes faces". I think it is indeed unnecessary stress to the animal and I personally don't like these 'faces'. Also the "open mouth lizards", which some people seems to find cool and 'macho', are not really my taste. However, I don't think it always causes that much damage to the snake itself, because snakes have a polykinetic skull (= skull bones are not fused like ours) BUT of course, there's a limit to those 'kinetics' too = they are not indestructible either. Would be nice, in fact, if e.g. a car tyre would be ripped into pieces when a car runs over an indestructible snake ;-)))). 

I would like to answer Jeroen on the newt photography topic. I have to disagree a bit with you Jeroen, because when the water of the pond is clear, it is totally possible to take good pictures of newt without handling them or put them into a aquarium.

For that, two solutions. First one: newts are staying on the shallow part of the pond, near the banks and the water is really clear, as it's often the case in flood plains, then, you place you lens at a very close angle to the water surface, and shoot. Here are some examples:

These 3 newts shots were made without touching them, and without even stepping inside the pond! It's not always like that, sometimes I do step on foot or both feet in the pond (though it's not recommended as it creates waves), and sometimes I tease the animals with a stick (not with the hand otherwise you get your fingers wet, and it's not good for the camera!).

Second solution: use a waterproof case for your camera. This kind of picture is not easy to shoot, but it works anyway. Here's one example I did on Pelobates fuscus eggs:

Of course, eggs are much more easier to take pictures of in these conditions than animals that are moving. But still it works if you are patient.

Ah, yes, one more thing, all these were shot at night. Much more easier.
 

And I just wanted to point out that as I said before, I still sometimes catch newts for identification purposes. 

Hmmm... I still prefer a clear profile view of a newt.

Maybe less natural, I'd have to admit, but how can you get a good look at that crest from a suboptimal angle? Your pics get better points concerning disturbance and naturalness, but are not on top on estethics (for my personal taste! and while the alpestris is really nice, actually, but... no crest!). Plus, like you said, not always possible. I don't think it's a coincidence that you showed animals from near your home, am I right?

Yet, I did the same thing with Calotriton arnoldi.

Also an "in the water" shot. Note: no crest and a rock surface that was under a very helpful slope. HOWEVER we 'had to' handle the animal (= bad points for me, again), because it went underneath a rock as soon as it saw torch light...

Still hoping for some thoughts on my Caretta story...

Jeroen, yes, you are absolutely right about the fact that the pictures I posted were taken where I work, on sites that I monitor each year. But still, if I was in another country and saw a new species that I know I wouldn't see again anytime soon, I'd still take these kind of picture. Because another aspect why I prefer (or rather why I'm contented with) these kinds of shots is that I already carry (what I consider) a lot of gear on the field, and for me a small aquarium would be just too much. So the fact that I'm lazy encourage me not to put newts in an aquarium for pictures.

But also, I have to say that sometimes I take pictures of the soles of females smooth or palmate newts, and in this case, I handle them. So don't get me wrong, I don't think that putting newts in an aquarium is bad when it's done reasonably, by someone who knows what he's doing. I'm just pointing out the fact that it's totally possible to get clear and good pictures of newts in ponds without handling them, and you can identify them without a problem on these kinds of pictures. 

Jeroen, for me your Caretta photography caused very minimal disturbance. If you took flash photographs as she was laying eggs I would have to criticise, but you merely took the photos as she was making her way back into the sea. I cannot tell how close you were able to get from the pictures and if you used a zoom.

I agree it is surely more memorable to do it this way than from a boat, but of course not many people to my knowledge do it the way you did so that is okay. So long as too many people don't decide to do the same thing I guess. 

a little out of topic but, I really want to start diving lessons to have the chance of taking pictures in situations like this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqP9MxtlCVk

Look here how photos of sea turtles should look like: http://www.herpetofauna.gr/index.php?module=cats&page=read&id=55&sid=51

:-) 

Jeroen-
I wouldn't worry too much about your turtle, I'm sure she was fine. When I was working on a turtle conservation project I had to physically prevent a loggerhead from re-entering the water in order to retrieve a time-depth recorded glued to her back the previous month. She came back up on the beach and laid a nest full the next night :)

Also, If you are going to photograph a turtle at night, once they start laying eggs, they will almost certainly finish and cover the nest. If you disturb them whilst they are coming up the beach or digging the nest they will head back to the sea as quick as they can. 

First of all I must correct a serious clerical error which I made in my earlier contribution as I wrote:
"We must treat the animals well, but in my opinion we should also try to become very emotional."

That does not really make sense as it should read:
"We must treat the animals well, but in my opinion we should also try to AVOID becomING very emotional."

Ilian, you ask what we should NOT do when we try to catch an animal. It is a bit hard to say, but do not harm the animal. Specifically about SNAKES: If you have grabbed a snake whose front part has already got stuck into a rock crevice, then do not PULL it out. Just hold it and prevent it from going deeper. After some time it will gradually release its grip in the crevice and very slowly and carefully you can pull it out gently without causing damage. If you are holding a harmless snake, it is best to hold in the front part of the body which will generally make it more calm. Much more calm than if you hold it in the tail which (as far as I can judge) may make the snake "believe" that it is close to escaping if it just struggles more. If you do not like to run the risk of becoming bitten and you prefer to keep it firmly in the neck, then you should also support the front part of the body (and preferably also the hind part) with your hands. But as mentioned before: If I have already found (and photographed or captured) two Hierophis gemonensis, and I find a third individual (looking quite "ordinary") trying to escape into such a crevice, then I see no reason to catch it!

Moreover, do not destroy part of the habitat just because you want to catch an animal. One of the worst things I know is if herpetologists destroy nice and extremely important stone terraces. Never move/remove these stones and rocks! Even when the owner has allowed you to enter his land, it will be a disgrace if you destroy his wonderful work. If (or when) you turn rocks, then always remember to put it back in their original position.

Otherwise it may be a good idea to join experienced field herpers and learn from them. Of course you should consider their actions critically: We are all different and we cannot endorse any method applied by such a herper just because he is experienced! You should indeed judge yourself. Perhaps we can meet one day in the field in Bulgaria?!

Jeroen, you are absolutely right: If or when I manage to find a rare or unusual species, I do not dream of taking such "najadum-like" or "vivipara-like" photos, and I will be happy to take good documentation photos which will probably not be so natural-looking. I agree that I really do not want to dictate what kind of photos are "correct".

Should a newt in the aquatic phase be photographed in situ from above or in an aquarium from the side? Well, for sure both methods have their advantages and disadvantages. Both ways serve fine purposes. But a newt photo taken in water from the above will not show the unique ventral pattern and coloration.

Sea turtle photos: I also like to photograph them underwater:
http://www.natureswindow.dk/Chelonia%20mydas.html

But photographing a sea turtle just after its egg-laying will illustrate another part of its natural behaviour. Also valuable! Again, let's not dictate what is "right" and "wrong".

Kind regards,
Henrik Bringsøe 

Cars, predation, pollution, destroyed habitats, illegal collectors… and handling ? I don't think so !

My view --> it could be bad if you catch animals for nothing and/or if you always catch each and every animal on your way without discernment.

But if you want good pictures, you have no choice, you MUST catch. Of course it's possible to get good pictures of frogs, salamanders… without manipulation, but it's often very very difficult for reptiles. It also depends of your requirement for quality ; for some herpers it will be a good picture… for me it will be a bad one, or really too imprecise.
Anyway, rather often, my agency doesn't select that kind of photos, because the light is not good, the grass is just in front of the eye, etc. They are not "workable" (However, I'm explaining a personal situation).

And from my experiences, if you want sensitize people to the beauty of wildlife, reptiles, amphibians and others, you need very good pictures. Otherwise you can't.

Now, I will add a provoking question : what about scientist studies ?

When I was more focused on birds, I heard some bad words from scientists about wildlife photographers, they sound like : "They disturb avifauna".

But the same scientists killed every years a lot of birds in their mist nets, "only" to ring the animals… maybe you were unaware about that. And this is legal !! Please don't tell me that's essential, I won't believe you !

So I think it's a false debate, the threat is not here so long as the animals are respected and released in the field at the same place.

And just to contradict my comments above :o)) here is a good picture of a 'free' Acanthocercus atricollis. I spend 2 hours in a hideout, waiting for the blue color. If you catch it, you will get a grey ugly lizard within a few seconds. I have to admit, sometimes, you have no choice indeed !

http://www.deschandol-sabine.com/film/atric.jpg


 

Hey what's this? A photo contest? Ok, I can't win :-D 

I know some of your pics, Ilian, Im sure you can win !! 

It's probably logical that this discussion is linked to our photographical desires. If cameras would not exist, I would catch less, I think. With the camera, comes a desire to document and save memories.

People who don't take pictures (or take some 'just for fun') are maybe less fanatic in general? With the exception of the snake catchers going for the 'kick' of it. I cannot really blame the latter type of people, because they have caught so many snakes that I was allowed to admire (and photograph!) afterwards.

I tend to think that scientific purposes may call for exceptions, where you catch more or all specimens, but Frank has a point that research is not necessarily done according to "proper field herping conduct". I guess it all depends on the person, in the end, regardless of the purpose of catching/disturbing a snake.

Besides that, I think everyone agrees that being able to catch a fast snake does something to the adrenaline levels, no? 

> Cars, predation, pollution, destroyed habitats,
> illegal collectors… and handling ? I don't think so !

OK, some people might say we're trying to make ourselves feel better, but that sums it up just perfectly for me.


 

@Henrik,thank you for reminding that tips for keeping the animals save when catching them.I wrote that I'm not so experienced because I haven't got the chance to go herping in different countries and finding that much species as most of you guys here,but for some years now I've been using alsmost every free time I have to go herping in Bulgaria and when I'm not I'm home reading this fat books on herpetofauna (and not only european).So I can't say I'm experienced as much as most of the members here but I do my best to educate myself and I'm pretty much familiar with that rules and I can say that I'm following them! Actually I'm not a fan of catching the snakes by the neck! I think it really stresses them a lot so I don't do it!

@Frank,you've mistaken the name!:)Ilias..not Ilian!It's just one letter,so it can be confusing!:) But I agree that IliaS can win a photo competition!:)

And since you guys are showing in-situ snakes..here's one from me! Not so rarely encountered case but I still love it!

Cheers! 

Hi guys,

I` ve answered this a few hours ago, but my reply did not appear...

So, i`ll try again, with a shorter version:

``So, what's your opinion on good or not? ``

I say catch the snake, get some cool shots, let it go. This shouldn`t take more than 5 minutes or so.


``What would the impact be of catching a snake on the survival of that animal? ``

No impact at all, if you keep the photo session short and simple.

``Do you catch any snake, even if it's the 24th ammodytes of the day?``

I get bored with seeing the same species over and over again, so i ignore the ones i got pictures of, and concentrate on finding other species for the diversity in the report.

``How do you feel about entering private property while herping?``

Ask nicely for permission, and only snakehunt if it is granted. Otherwise , do not risk your life.

``And nature reserves?``

Those are some good places to herp indeed.

``And what about the legal aspects of catching?``

yeah, what about them!?! Never heard of such things.

Catch or do not cath, do as you please just stay safe, and replace natural and artificial cover as you found it.

Cheers,
Vlad 

Hi Frank,

Wildlife photographers are criticized "by some people" for disturbing animals. Bird-watchers (professionals as well as amateurs) who carry out bird-ringing are criticized "by some people" for disturbing or even killing birds. Scientists involved in field work are criticized "by some people" for similar reasons. And so on.

Most of all these naturalists are probably doing a good and useful job, but indeed some or a few are too careless. It will always be like that.

It is my impression that bird-ringing is well controlled by the authorities. At least in Denmark where the results are monitored by the authorities and for each project a separate permit for bird-ringing has to be granted. Other scientific work involving wild animals usually serve good purposes. If a new species of lizard or frog is being described, it will usually be necessary to sacrifice a few individuals. Exceptionally new descriptions of species which are considered rare (often such new species are hard to find, though not necessarily rare, but with increasing body mass it is generally easier to judge abundance) are based on photographs plus DNA material and of course detailed descriptions of live specimens which are later released, but that solution is certainly not ideal.

I am not happy with too much pointing fingers at the above-mentioned groups of naturalists, but I can fully accept that such examples appeal to our emotions and that it is impossible for everybody to agree upon the question: "To what extent may our work or actions affect wild animals?"

Yes Jeroen, catching a fast snake does something to the adrenaline levels, but not really if it is merely "yet another H. gemonensis, M. insignitus or N. tessellata of the day"! You are also right that basically all of us have some guilty feelings about (a few of) our past actions in the field. At least I do. You live and learn!

Kind regards,
Henrik Bringsøe 

By the way..I was always wondering why when a new species is discoverd,some individuals should be killed to be described!? I don't actually agree with that! I can understand why they did it in the 18th century,but nowadays I can point some methods of avoiding this...if it's only a matter of describing the morphology! Trully it costs much more but people spend huge amounts of money on far more useless things! 

Hi Ilian,

I fully understand that sacrificing (or killing) one or several specimens for the purpose of describing a new species or subspecies may be considered waste of animal life. I will try to explain why it is so essential to have type specimen(s) stored in museum collection for each species.

I do not like if we give priority to one discipline above another one within biology. For instance is ethology more important or less important than ecology? It does not really make sense as they are all important for our understanding of the world. However, I must admit that I find one thing quite basic in biology: THE SPECIES. If we do not know whether one group of animals which we study belong to one species or two distinct species, then our study will be fairly useless. Thus, the definition of the various species which we work with, is very fundamental.

You are right that a new species can be described in a detailed way on the basis of several live specimens which can then be released afterward. Photographs and blood samples can be taken at the same time. However, it will never be possible to make a description which other researchers can or will not raise questions about later. It happens often that a new description will become rejected by other researchers who have then re-examined the type specimen(s) and made different interpretations. Specimens of species X which have then been placed in synonymy with species Y may be examined a third time by others who may check characters which have so far not been considered - and now it be elevated to status of a distinct species again! All these studies may be confusing, but they will and should probably increase our knowledge about that species (if it is a distinct species)!

If all type specimens have become released, then it may prove impossible to re-examine that species. You may argue that new researchers may just go to the locality where the species was found to catch and check some new individuals. But when you catch some new individuals, can you be absolutely certain that they belong to the same species which the original description was based upon? At that place several species may be very similar. And after maybe 50 years the habitat may have been altered or even destroyed.

Thus, it is fundamental that there is one single specimen on which the species was based and described. That will be the definition of that particular species which can then be re-examined in case of disagreement. That is called the holotype. But for several characters there will inevitably some variation, for instance in scale counts. To reflect variation it is common and very useful that several other specimens of that species will also exist. They will be called paratypes.

Such museum specimens will often give us extremely important knowledge of our understanding of biodiversity. Such a knowledge is important for many purposes, for instance nature conservation.

I will be happy to clarify the above, if you wish.

Kind regards,
Henrik Bringsøe 

Ilian, there are indeed other options; a paper was published last year (I think) in Zootaxa of which the author was in favor of not killing individuals of very rare, newly discovered species for the type series. This has been put into practice with the description of Conolophus marthae of which the living holotype was microchipped instead of killed. See http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/list/2009/zt02201.html on discussions about this! 

@Henrik,I understand the importance of type speciments but there are other ways of having such!When I wrote that I can point some methods to avoid this I was thinking of something that (as far as I know) haven't been tried,yet! There are this high tech 3 dimensional scaners which are used in creating the modern CGI movies you are watching(like Pixar's,etc.).What they do is they sculpt a maquettes of the characters and than scan them with those scaners and they have a 3D character in the computer! I think that could be done with animals!It will give you a digital,3 dimensional,super detailed speciment,with scale number and everything,that can be stored in a database on the computer and the animal released back where it belongs!That combined with nice colour photos will give us a type speciment that could be analized by whoever wants to,and even better it will be in the same great condition as a live one forever(preserved specimens often get more or less ruined or changed after a some time).You can add to this a microchip on the animal(as Wouter pointed out),so it can be relocated if needed!So I'm pretty sure humans CAN think of many ways to do that but as usual we choose the easiest and cheapest one! 

Ilian, I don't like the fact that scientists are killing animals for the description of a sp. but that idea with the 3d scanner is quite impossible for living objects. The object has to be still to be scanned. 

Ilias,yes I know they should be still! As they should be still when they put microchips under their skin and they put them to sleap for that purpose.Anaesthetic could be used for the purpose of scaning,too..I know that can be dangerous but it's still better than killing them,in my opinion! 

@Ilian : ahah sorry for the mistake, it was late ! I love your Natrix, for sure another picture that you can't get by catching…

@Henrik : thanx for your accurate infos. I'm not a scientist but why only a small sample of the animal (tail, phalanx…) couldn't be only kept for eventual DNA research ? And for the morphological one, there's other ways. Now with new technology you can easily make a laser modeling, elastomer mold etc. I know, it's not really cheap !

Of course I'm not criticizing the scientists, it was just an example like that. But I'm always very enervated when I hear a such speech about photographers (even if a few are disrespectful, it's obvious).

Another one : You can easily get troubles when catching a snake to make only a few pictures, because it's forbidden… but you can, without any problem, crush dozens of reptiles and amphibians on the road with your car…

Perhaps I'm wrong but I think my EOS Canon is less dangerous ;o)

EDIT : @Ilian we are definitely on the same wavelength ! 

@Frank,I am very happy that there are other people sharing my opinion! The more people think that way,the sooner this will become reallity!We just need someone very rich that thinks like us!:)But I'm optimistic about that..it's going to happen sooner or later! 

Wouter, thanks for casting light on the Conolophus marthae issue, with the very interesting debate - including all the pros and cons in the current case! That case as well as one of the new descriptions of primates mentioned by Donegan (page 17) were exactly those which I had in mind as I wrote:

"Exceptionally new descriptions of species which are considered rare (often such new species are hard to find, though not necessarily rare, but with increasing body mass it is generally easier to judge abundance) are based on photographs plus DNA material and of course detailed descriptions of live specimens which are later released, but that solution is certainly not ideal."

I appreciate that all of you care so much for the survival and welfare of even a few individuals of reptiles and amphibians. But perhaps it would be more productive to ALSO pay attention to the immense numbers of reptiles and amphibians which are lost due to habitat destruction. In Europe it is often a violation of the EU Habitats Directive. I have seen many such cases in Greece (for instance valuable habitats with many strictly protected species of Annex IV, turned into e.g. vineyards) and I consider whether it will be possible to bring such a case for the EU Commission.

I would like to present one case joining new descriptions of species with habitat protection. The Zoological Museum of Copenhagen has made much research in the field in the Udzungwa Mountains, Tanzania. With many descriptions of new species of vertebrates and invertebrates, including series of type specimens stored in the museum collections. These mountains are severely threatened by continuous habitat destructions (clearing of forests). As a direct result of the many new descriptions, it seems thar it will be possible preserve some of the richest forest areas with most endemic species such as the Mwanihana Forest. That will be a great achievement! In that light it is really of minor importance that a number of frogs, snakes, birds, millipedes etc. have been sacrificed and added to the museum collections.

But I will also emphasise that the economy of our Zool.Mus. Cph. is extremely tight with cost-cutting. For instance the situation is so critical that there is no longer any herpetological department here or at any other Danish museum, so now herpetological research in Denmark has actually become eliminated. That is indeed a (tragic) paradox considering Denmark being a very wealthy country, but that is "thanks" to our government. I think that the situation is similar in many other countries. I just want to mention that in order to illustrate that the resources available for innovation in methods of taxonomy are often very limited.

Kind regards,
Henrik Bringsøe 

“To catch or not to catch...”
I think in this discussion, you have to make a distinction between going herphunting alone or in group. Reading the above, I think all participants to this forum can be trusted to behave sensible when they go in the field alone. However, this can all change when a group of 10-15 enthousiasts goes on a herphunting frenzy, especially when they are on holiday, and they only have 1 or 2 weeks to twitch everything : sense of competition and/or frustration of not catching anything can lead to overzealous habitat destruction, caught animals are stached away quickly and carelessly and are often kept too long in this conditions in order not to loose to much precious time in the optimal catching window, which can often lead to unnecessary stress and in some cases even the dead of the animal, and then there is the actual photoshoot : 15 nervous fanatics who all want to make the perfect picture of the animal caught, causing again a lot of stress and often stretching the photosession irresponsibly.
Let’s admit : we are all guilty !
That’s why I think that when you go on herphunting in a group, it is wise to have an agreement before you go, a small set of rules, let’s call it a code of conduct.
 

@Jan it nearly took 40 posts until someone on this board started a bit of self-critizm instead of statements that give ourselfes a charter to stress animals like "Cars, predation, pollution, destroyed habitats, illegal collectors… and handling ? I don't think so !" or "But if you want good pictures, you have no choice, you MUST catch."
I am sorry to destroy rose-colored glasses, but as said on the other board, catching creates stress and instead of telling novices or people that haven't caught yet, that one cannot make good pictures without catching, we should be role models and provide guidelines when and how to catch animals and when NOT to catch them.
I cannot believe that the message of this thread is that people who keep animals in vivariums are evil, while on the other hand catching animals in the field doesn't harm anyone. THIS IS WRONG! It is wrong to say catching doesn't stress or harm animals, because it depends on many circumstances. But I haven't found a discussion about them in this thread besides Jeroens tortoise (thanks for that interruption).
I mean, I imagine all those guys having the digital-photo-desease that frequent the photo boards on the internet and, thus, also all the habitats around the cities etc. They read "you have to catch" so let's buy some thick leather gloves and on it goes. Brilliant, well done, very good advice.
Btw. I keep and kept snakes in vivs as well as some large agressive geckos. Having handled hundreds of hatchlings in sommer per week and like 50-60 adult snakes, I am pretty confident that I am a skilled snake and gecko handler. What about all you guys that snakes one or two times a year during a trip? You all know/carry out proper handling? You all have the ability to do this safely for you and the snake/lizard? Well you think so? Do you think all the novices frequenting this board, reading "you have to catch, it doesn't harm" have it as well?
Sorry if this post sounds somewhat rude, but I am really missing a critical discussion on our influence on the animals in this thread and, even more, I am missing clear statements and guidelines for beginners as well as experts what rules should be respected when catching animals for the sake of a photo. I have raised some ideas on that on the other board that I don't want to double post. However, as the admins care about their name because I did not give details one my, neither a photo, I think they should care about their name when the "long story short" of this thread is: Catching doesn't harm, you have to catch to make good photos.

Thanks,
Michael 

@ Michael: not rude, but a bit angry perhaps? I'm happy to discuss any of this, but let's keep it 'cool'?

My intention with this thread was not to end up with a rule book, but to learn about the rules each of us hold for themselves, without judging each other. But, of course, it's in a way more interesting to disagree and have an actual discussion, I guess. Also, as soon as people start to respons, this is no longer "my" thread, of course.

Something aside first. In general, I have the impression that you are thinking about small, endangered Western European populations, while many of us have the beautiful Balkans in our minds. Maybe this should not matter, but to me it makes quite a difference, and I'm guessing that might in part explain your sensitive (but not necessarily sentimental) view.

> I cannot believe that the message of this thread is that > people who keep animals in vivariums are evil, while on
> the other hand catching animals in the field doesn't harm > anyone.
That's double exaggeration for me, sorry.
- In my opinio, animal keepers are not evil, but (large scale) poachers are doing a bad thing. Besides that, terraristics are based on an entire animal industry, while field herping will, imho, always remain a small scale activity. !!! I don't mean to say that it therefore is harmless, because it can be very harmful in some cases (e.g. Greek Chamaeleo africanus).
- I feel that it has been clearly stated by several people here, that IF you catch, you have to catch with great care.

> "But if you want good pictures, you have no choice,
> you MUST catch."
OK, that may sound a bit silly, but how can you deny that it is very hard to have (nice) in situ pictures of Platyceps najadum and other speedy snakes? I think that's what's being meant?

> we should be role models and provide guidelines when and
> how to catch animals and when NOT to catch them.
Hmmm... If you knew me better, I don't think you'd want me to be anybody's role model ;-))).

> the digital-photo-desease
:-).

It would indeed be nice to attach to this site a "must read" rule book. Why don't you put down a proposal, Michael? I think it will be difficult to agree on such a text, but I'm in favour of the idea.

> Having handled hundreds of hatchlings in sommer per week
> and like 50-60 adult snakes, I am pretty confident that I
> am a skilled snake and gecko handler.
I'm sure you are, but I think each species is different + I think there CAN at least be some difference between the liveliness of captive and wild animals. I've seen many, many "fat bastard" reptiles in captivity. On the other hand, others keep their temper, also in a cage...

> What about all you guys that snakes one or two times a
> year during a trip? You all know/carry out proper
> handling?
I think this is a (too) judgemental statement, given the (quite good) intentions of the people here? However, I realise you may have a good point there.

> "Cars, predation, pollution, destroyed habitats, illegal > collectors… and handling ? I don't think so !"
I do not want to avoid a proper conduct discussion (of course...), but if you think you need to get angry about a this, than I would like to see you have a go at some of the nice stuff like this (which is still in the danger zone...) => http://www.bankwatch.org/project.shtml?s=232097

 

Hi Michael,

Be careful that you do not generalise and lump all of us together! I fully understand that you may not be happy with several contributions written in this thread, but I recommend that you address those parts directly. You may for instance quote certain parts directly and them explain why you disagree. There are indeed several ways of participating in this discussion, but I find it a bit inappropriate when you write something like this:
"I cannot believe that the message of this thread is that people who keep animals in vivariums are evil, while on the other hand catching animals in the field doesn't harm anyone. THIS IS WRONG!"

I know that you start your sentence with "I cannot believe...", but you imply that there is such a message. There is no such overall message of this thread as I am certain that there considerable disagreement among us. For instance: Are all people who keep amphibians and reptiles in vivarium "evil"? I do not mind at all such people and their hobby (though there are parts of that community that I do not like), but I know that a number of users of this forum are against herpetoculture. Catching anmals in the field: Also here there is quite some disagreement in this thread as some seem to believe that we should leave the animals "untouched" whereas I (and others) do not mind catching them when we find it "appropriate". From the very beginning I said openly that this will cause SOME stress to animals though I (and others) expressed that such stress will usually be quite harmless. I also advocated that we should not become too emotional (initially I messed up that sentence as I forgot the word "not", sorry!).

You have written:
"It is wrong to say catching doesn't stress or harm animals, because it depends on many circumstances. But I haven't found a discussion about them in this thread besides Jeroens tortoise (thanks for that interruption)."

Then you should search more carefully! For instance I wrote as follows:
"You are also right that basically all of us have some guilty feelings about (a few of) our past actions in the field. At least I do."

You also wrote:
"... I am missing clear statements and guidelines for beginners as well as experts what rules should be respected when catching animals for the sake of a photo."

No Michael, that does not make sense. As I have emphasised throughout my contributions, you cannot really look at things in such a "black and white" way. How to behave entirely depends on the situation. Being in the field is not a football match where you can set up strict rules. Well, of course you can set up whichever rules you may desire, but if you create such "clear statements and guidelines", then people will probably just laugh at them!

It is deliberately that I did not want to discuss herpetoculture in this thread as I felt that would not serve any purpose.

For sure I can feel that you have become upset because of a number of contributions here, but please be more specific when you want to express disagreement which will also make your own arguments stronger.

Kind regards,
Henrik Bringsøe 

@ Jan: Hmmmm, I think I know the nervous fanatic who wrote that ;-).

First a little thing about groups. Ilias alluded to this as well, I think. Are bigger groups worse than small ones? Probably yes. Maybe not if you split up the group into smaller ones which all go to the same place and disturb the place and the animals again. I should admit that I am guilty of both (see (*)).
The "bigger group events" are not really the rule, are they? To me, it seems that we (“the Belgians”) are perhaps the only ones who have done European herp trips with 15 people (*). I have to admit it can get hectic at times and I underestimate the preparation it takes (done by Jan…). On the other hand (and of more general relevance to the people who read this, I guess), I e.g. really enjoyed the mixed composition of our Samos team. I like to herp with different people with different past experiences etc. Yes, you can of course do that spread over several trips, but the interaction is just something special. I also have very nice memories of typical smaller group moments. I like it both.
By telling people (who I trust!) about places I’ve been to, so they can also go there and enjoy themselves makes me also guilty of the second type of “(*)”.

> sense of competition and/or frustration of not catching
Personally, I've always found that to be a bit silly; I'm always happy with the collective result of the group, regardless of the (lack of) macho appeal of my own contribution (read: so damn lazy...). Apart from that, it’s nice to contribute too, of course.

Sorry about that. Now back to the issue of this thread.
> overzealous habitat destruction
True, although the bigger stones hold the bigger secrets + those stones are not always easy to 'persuade' back into their original position. Also here, I think the damage level depends on the context: in the south of Belgium there are well-known spots where only few stones are, which are flipped much too often. The result seems to be less snakes (BUT how can you tell??? By turning over those same stones?). Anyway, I would agree that for such small isolated populations in small and fragile habitat patches, this can indeed be genuinely devastating.
Different context: some reptile-heaven places in the Balkans are so extremely packed with suitable hideouts, that not putting a few stones back where they were, will have, in my (according to Michael perhaps despicable…) opinion, little or no impact on the local reptile populations. The impact on the temper of the local farmer populations might differ, though ;-). So, again context! Bottom line: in general, we all should, of course (but I feel this has been said already) care about this and try to cause as little as possible damage and disturbance. OK, “as little as possible” in fact would mean “none whatsoever” but -again- I really don’t want to stay at home…

Bottom line seems to be that I should feel much more guilty than I realised. Heading straight for a winter depression here, guys ;-).

EPILOGUE

One of the ways out of this, is this: field herping has nothing to do with noble acts or saving the world. It’s an equally valid hobby as collecting stamps (or maybe even legally obtained reptiles, let’s be nice for a change). I do it just for FUN. I think that goes for all of us. For all I know, that doesn’t even have to mean that you care about environmental issues…
 

As MOST of us here that took part in the discussion I feel that nobody has any bad intentions regarding herps and their habitat!And I don't think there was a bad overall message of this thread(Michael you should read more carefully)!And I have to agree with Jeroen for that last one!We do really go herping just for FUN(except if it's not some kind of scientific researh)!All I know is that I don't remember having this kind of discussion during summer,have we?Warm weather will come and people will start posting new reports and than nobody will care if the animals in the photos from those reports were cought or not..and completely different comments will be posted!So,let's not get too emotional and touchy on that issue because truth is we ALL catch animals for photos from time to time(it would be hypocritical if someone deny it) and right now we miss that very much and winter depression is saying it's word! 

Ilian: "Michael you should read more carefully"
Well, let me tell you what, you are 100% right. It's my inferior english skills that prevent me from fully understanding what people have actually said in this thread. Moreover, my arguments are nothing more than a winter depression and I recommend to everyone to immediately forget what I said and not think too much about the way we all field herp and propose/promote field herping in the internet.
Thanks,
Micha 

I was not my intention to critisise the "group events", I enjoy them too much myself. I'm just saying that when we're out in the field in a group, we should be aware that our impact is much bigger than when we go alone.
That's why I believe that this was a very usefull discussion, if we keep it in mind the next time we go herphunting.
@ everyone who feels guilty, angry, insulted or depressed : let's use this thread for what it was meant for : catharsis. 

> if we keep it in mind the next time we go herphunting.
I'll try ;-).

And to lighten up ;-)
http://tenerife-training.net/Tenerife-News-Cycling-Blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/farside-cancer-smoking.jpg 

Or maybe even more appropriate...
http://sarahealy.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/farside-cartoon.jpg 

To end the discussion from my side, I will never induce anyone to catch reptiles and amphibians. As I said, it's a personal opinion and essential for my work ; I just wanted to be sincere and straightforward. If you can make good pictures of animal without handling, well I think it's better indeed. But the fact is that's very difficult or it takes too much time. Possible when you are near your home but impossible if you are in a planned trip.
Finally, I think there is also a big difference about the stress between catching a toad and catching a snake… 

Hi
Regarding the turtle, I have worked a bit with sea-turtles in Asia (C. mydas) and been adviced by experienced sea-turtle scientists not to use flashes in the direction of the turtles eyes due to their sensitivity and they obviously needing them for orientation. Probably not a major problem, but something to bear in mind. I have to admit that I also have photographed sea-turtles from the front a few times in the past before realising this so I don't blame you for doing so to, not sure either that it's a big issue.

Regarding mist-netting birds, maybe a bit of topic, but because I have nets out at the moment I might comment on that to :) As my fellow scandinavian allready said, catching birds are strongly regulated, if you see anyone doing it improperdly please reporrt it to the responsible authority. In my experience it's very rare with missconduct.
Going for net-rounds are BTW good for finding herps to, sofar today one nice emys, a bunch of L.viridis and P. ridibunda.

Regarding catching. If properdly done the stress for the animal is small and of short period, for example I caught a L. viridis yesterday for some photos I needed, 20 min later she was sun-bathing again at the same spot, not abnormaly shy at all. But I understand that other people have other opinions. I myself rarely catch animals nowdays, they generally look nicer where they are, but then I'm not that much into photography. 10-15 years ago I catched pretty much everything that moved, guess thats how we learn, but at least I had experienced friends to teach me the proper way to handle the animals.

Hmm, not sure if my writting makes any sence, but bear in mind that I have been working since early dawn and did conduct experiments last night :)
Best Regards
Christoffer Sjoholm, presently in Kalimok, Bulgaria